Marriage Laws

[BadForumName]

Both I and my fiance are residents of Georgia. We plan on getting married in British Columbia, Canada later this year. My question is, will this marrage be valid in Georgia or will a seperate ceremony be required?

Secondly, what are the legal advantages of beoming married? I had origonally presumed that there would be an automatic durable power of attourney but have been told since that this is not so. Any information would be appreciated.

 

[cbg]

I cannot even begin to imagine why you would think that a marriage performed in Canada would not be legal in the US. As long as it is performed by someone who is legally authorized to do so in B.C., it will be legal.

 

[MaggieK]

If you have to ask the legal advantages to being married, maybe you should reconsider getting married. The purpose of being married is not a legal issue, or shouldnt be. Unless of course you expect your mate to die in the very near future and they happen to be wildly wealthy!

 

[BadForumName]

Response to posts

As far as Canadian marrage being legal in Georgia, I am actually wondering not if the marrage itself will be legal but how to have it legally registered in Georgia. Is there a process involved or does Canada call Georgia and let them know. That sort of thing.

In response to the person who wanted to know why I questioned the legal advantages, I'm not one to go though life assuming things. I had assumed that it would create a durable power of attourny and was told I was wrong. Seems that in order to have the rights reguarding my wife that I thought marrage would give me (inforcement of living will, default inheritance rights, etc) it may require extra steps that I had not considered. A marrage license being a legal document such as it is, it must have legal clauses. To be ignorant of them would be, well ignorant.

Asking the question isn't me questioning my purpose in getting married. In fact I take some issue at your comment . I simply find it useful to know something about the legal issues that are involved.

 

[djohnson]

If you are legally married by the standards of the US then you are legally married where ever those standards are observed. No one is calling to call up every state and country and say "hey these people are married" If you ever have to prove it you use your marriage certificate. When people move from other countries to US they don't go down to the court house and put their marriage certificate on file. They are married or they are not.

 

[MaggieK]

Married spouses have no rights to each other in the United States. You have obligations and responsibilities to each other, by law and by virtue of your vows. The law "assumes" you will honor those obligations and vows. Should you opt not to, then there are laws which protect the injured party. A marriage license is a license to have a marriage ceremony, just as a drivers license is a license to drive a vehicle. When the license is recorded, after the ceremony, it is simply a record keeping means for marriages performed. It has no further purpose.

Should your spouse die intestate, without a will, usually the surviving spouse comes into any property, monies, etc. of the deceased. Should your spouse desire to make a will, he/she may state any beneficiary they desire to inherit all or part of their estate. It does not have to be the spouse. The surviving spouse does not always automatically have rights to the estate by virtue of marriage.

Not legal advice, Life advice.

 

[BadForumName]

Married spouses have no rights to each other in the United States. You have obligations and responsibilities to each other, by law and by virtue of your vows. The law "assumes" you will honor those obligations and vows.

That makes much more sense. However you seem to contridict yourself in the above statement. If you have no rights to each other but have obligations and responsibilities, that could be construed as a right. A persons obligations to me become my rights and vice-versa. Also it seems that if one were to lose your wedding vows there would be no legal recourse ("Of course I never promised to be faithful your honor; show me the proof") when there does appear that there in fact is.

I also find it a bit odd that a marrage license is even required if there are no legal ramifications involved. Obviously there is the historical advantage of a public record of the marrige, but most public records exist for extra rights and benifits such as those for a car title. Ah well, I obviously need to do some checking on this matter. Thank you for your help though.

Oh, djohnson, that was what I wanted to know, thank you.

 

[MaggieK]

I fail to see the contradicton you reference. Responsibilites and obligations are not rights..they are responsibilities and obligations. The responsibilites and obligations to a spouse cannot be forced by law. They can however be disposed. As in dissolution of marriage, which is a legal procedure, which can only be accomplished if the parties were legally married. Which in turn could not have taken place had the parties not had a marriage license. It appears that the focus of this topic is not regarding the marriage license, but more about ownership of another person. As a wonderful judge told the husband of a woman who was trying to divorce him against his will, "Slavery was abolished long ago in this country, you have no RIGHTS to your spouses life, irregardless of marriage or otherwise."

 

[djohnson]

I think you are missing the whole question. Try reading it again. The poster just wanted to know if they got married in canada was is legal in the US and what did he have to do to make it legal. Nothing about owning, slavery, or even duties and responsibilities were mentioned.

Good Luck to the OP

 

[BadForumName]

Let me expalin my line of thought in this manner... If I have a child it is my responsibility to provide that child with food, clothing and shelter. From the childs point of view he/she has a right to food, clothing and shelter. If you are familure with the physical theory of relativity then you could apply the same reasoning to this I suppose... if I see it as a responsibility then you could see it as a right.

I'm quite aware of the personal responsibilities that I have with my fiance, and was simply looking to see if anyone had done the research to see what my legal responsibilties are. Again, I just find it important to know.

Your slavery comment was a hoot! If you actually knew myself or my fiance you would understand that only a person who knew us for less than 5 minutes would even allow that statement to cross their mind. You have actually made my week! I haven't laughed so hard in days, I suspect she will have a similar reaction, as we have had a good laugh over your other comments too...

We are both very practical minded individuals. She an engineer and myself a programmer. It is within our personalities to ask these questions which apparently have been taken as an offence to your sensibilities. Rest assured and sleep well knowing that I do not make her; nor do I hold secret ambitions of making her; do anything. Not that I actually could anyway.

According to your profile you are a member of a legal counsiling service and I was simply asking for that legal council. I do not need emotional or spiritual guidance nor did I request it. I thank you for you time, but please next time you may find it benificial to answer the question a person has without reading other things into it. If your goal is truly to help other help themselves, perhaps you could direct me to the relevant legal code? Please forgive what may be construed as rudeness in this format (I've learned that forums don't convey voice inflection very well), it is simply my frustration in being unable to find the answer to the second part of my question. (djohnson kindly answered the first part.)

 

[djohnson]

I though the response was a hoot also. The reason I didn't answer your second question is it could go either way depending on your livestyle and goals and what you are trying to accomplish. Some people think that not getting married has an advantage because of the tax breaks and government assistance they might qualify for. Some people may think getting married has advantages because the spouse couldn't testify in court or something. I know these are extreme circumstances but I use them to show the variances in peoples thoughts. The advantages or disadvantages are all in the eye of the beholder. Good Luck.

 

[MaggieK]

Djohnson- The poster did make reference to what his rights were regarding his wife. Rights to another human being do not exist, however, responsibilities and obligations do. I was mistaken in my assumption that the poster would understand my reference.

" I had assumed that it would create a durable power of attourny and was told I was wrong. Seems that in order to have the rights reguarding my wife that I thought marrage would give me (inforcement of living will, default inheritance rights, etc) it may require extra steps that I had not considered."

I have reread all of my previous posts and find no personal comments toward you or your intended. However it is difficult to gauge the more sensitive posters in online forums. Being supposedly well educated, you and your future wife should be well able to comprehend the message offered. None of which is legal counsel or advice.

 

[djohnson]

I think maybe personal issues of your own has made you interpret rights to mean something degrading and ruling. I think you should try to take the question as a simple question and not permission to beat his wife. The rights he is talking about has nothing to do with physical power over her and hers just a coming together of joint responsibilities. I understood the post well enough. You did not even answer one of the questions only condemn him over the use of the word. Therefore your post was neither helpful or wanted by the OP. I am not degrading you by posting in contradiction to what you think, only offering the advice to the questions asked.

 

[MaggieK]

DJohnson-In your original answer to the poster, you answered the first question asked, and ignored the second. I answered the second question and felt no need to repeat what you said in your answer to the first question. A durable power of attorney is control over another persons general affairs, assets, and/or monies. It is control over her and hers. Again, I will suggest (suggest only) that if he is concerned about his "rights" in regard to his wife, ie: (inforcement of living will, default inheritance rights, etc)" I had assumed that it would create a durable power of attourny", she may want to give the matter further consideration. Rights can be a good or a not so good thing but my experiences are not the issue. I find individuals who are at a loss for the facts in this forum resort to making personal assumptions in the hopes of creating discord for their own personal entertainment. It is my choice not to be the entertainer. I would think the poster has either been provided ample food for thought or has the ability to research the subject further himself.

 

[BadForumName]

You guys crack me up!

Ok, I'll admit that I did not pen my second question with the precision that I had intended to. A fault that I will attempt to rectify. (And most likely fail yet again, but here's to trying!)

In my inner definition of the word right, I take it to be a good thing. My fiance and I happen to have a number of minor health problems which could result in one or the other being in a position of having to make a lamentable decision. This is one case where a "right" would be very helpful as I'm not one to request machine sustanance and I would like her to have the authority to fulfill these wishes if need be. This is one example.

Another example would be if (god-forbid) one of us were to have an affair. Now according to my (again, poor) understanding of the law, the offending party can be sued and the marrage terminated under these circumstances. This to me is an instance of a responsibility (not cheating) turning into a right (the right to sue). Not that I forsee this happening but one doesn't forsee having one's house flooded either, but being practically minded I like to know what the legallaties are with that as well (very poor choice of metaphor I know - but hopefully you get me drift).

Another example. As I understand the property of a married couple belongs to their joint ownership. This is fine by me, but this is obviously defined in some law somewhere. How it is written and what it entailss is of interest to me.

Basically the short question is this. Under what jurisdiction does marriage fall? Where can I find the appropiate sections of the law to read about them?

Now if you will excuse me, I gotta go learn my woman some things. Damn thing can't cook and I gotta go teach her good. Where's my belt...